Showing posts with label Badman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Badman. Show all posts
Friday, 15 November 2013
The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Home education
I have heard from one or two readers this morning, who feel that they have been left behind by the recent discussion here about the APPG on home education. Perhaps I should give a little background. There are dozens of informal groups at parliament, where MPs, peers and members of various charities, special-interest groups and so on get together to discuss anything from football and farming to brass bands. Or, in this case, home education. Although such groups have no real, official status, they can exert a certain amount of power especially when they are led by the Chair of the relevant select committee. Graham Stuart, for those who didn’t know.
Because MPs and peers are usually busy, the actual running of the groups is often delegated to a secretariat; a few people who arrange meetings, issue invitations, take minutes and sometimes act as gatekeepers. These individuals can really shape the APPG in their own image. In the case of the APPG on home education, these gatekeepers are Fiona Nicholson and Jane Lowe. Now immediately, some people can see a problem with that; or really two problems. The first is of course that nobody elected these two people to that role. It looks to some as though Fiona and Jane simply had the sharpest elbows and were shrewd enough at intriguing to get themselves into this position. The second problem that some have, is even bigger. It is that Fiona Nicholson and Jane Lowe share something in common with the present writer. (And no, for those who have been reading the awful things that Maire Stafford and her cronies have been saying about me, it is not that we all dye our hair!) The fact is that any new legislation or changes in regulations will not affect Fiona and Jane, because they are no longer home educators. It will be recalled that when I was invited to give evidence to the select committee in 2009, a great fuss was made about this and it was thought that the fact that my daughter was no longer being educated at home should have been enough to disqualify me from expressing an opinion on the subject. The same thing is now being said about Fiona Nicholson and Jane Lowe.
Some current home educators have another difficulty, as far as Fiona Nicholson is concerned. In 2009, she and a few friends, such as Ian Dowty, submitted this document during the Badman enquiry.
http://www.educationotherwise.net/attachments/article/151/Prospectus%20For%20Improving%20Support%20to%20Home%20Educating%20Families%200409.pdf
Among other things, it recommended:
4. Recommendation: that the DCSF Elective Home Education Team should
work with home education support organisations to set up a national
Committee for Home Education, remit to include contributing to
Government policy initiatives related to home education, contributing to
Impact Assessments and making recommendations related to Home
Education policy.
This national committee was to have a far-ranging but rather vague role and relationship to the government. It was not unnaturally assumed that Fiona visualised herself as heading this committee, which was to some sort of Quango. This belief was strengthened when she gave evidence to the Children, Schools and Families select committee on October 14th 2009. I was also giving evidence that day and one thing which struck me very powerfully was Fiona’s inability to say whether or not she approved of compulsory registration for home educators. Barry Sheerman, the Chair, pressed her repeatedly on this point, but she waffled on for some time, finally saying:
I am not taking a position on whether I think it would be a good or bad thing
Call me an old cynic, but the construction which I put upon that was that Fiona was in favour of registration, but reluctant to say so out loud, in case it alienated too many other home educators.
In short, there are those who are suspicious of Fiona Nicholson’s involvement in the APPG, because rather than being a home educating parent, she now has a commercial interest in the subject and is apparently being paid by at least one local authority to give advice. Incidentally, the APPG apparently has a website, about which few seem aware. If there really is such a thing, one guesses that it was set up by Fiona’s son Theo, who is something of a whiz about computer and internet related matters.
I must make one final point, which is that on a personal level, I am very much a fan of Fiona’s. She is an enthusiast for both the Molesworth and William books and I never knew anybody who enjoyed those books to be otherwise than fundamentally sound!
Monday, 26 October 2009
What is a curriculum?
So many autonomously educating parents seem to be vehemently opposed to the very idea of a curriculum, that I think it worth considering what we mean by the expression. A curriculum, at its most basic, is no more than a plan of study. It can be as simple as a list of subjects which will be covered over the next year or so. This is in itself hugely controversial, because of course the Badman report recommends that some such plan be compulsory and many parents are determined to have nothing to do with the idea. It has even been suggested that just giving such a plan would render autonomous education impossible. This seems very strange. Let us have a look at a curriculum and see whether or not it really would have this effect.
Here is a very simple curriculum; English, Mathematics, History, Geography, Science, Art, Music. How could such a curriculum work in practice? Let's look at one subject, Art. This could involve painting, drawing, making models from plasticine, visiting art galleries, looking at books about artists, watching television programmes, the list is endless. Just by doing one or two of those things each week, Art has been covered. What about science? Visits to zoos, keeping and observing an ant farm, hunting for fossils, watching tadpoles grow, going to a museum, attending a lecture, reading a Horrible Science book, watching television. One or two of those activities each week and science is covered. And so it goes on.
Most of these things are already being done by most home educating parents. In other words, the lifestyle and educational techniques used with their children will not have to change in the slightest degree in order to comply with the recommendation for a "Plan of Work". I am guessing that many parents are following a curriculum already, even if they do not call it by that name and have nothing written down. Most of us arrange a programme of event for out children which cover areas like art and music. Few parents fail to read to their children or discuss aspects of science with them. A curriculum like the one above does not tie a parent down to any particular activity or force the child to do anything against her inclinations. There is nothing scary about it, still less is it likely to destroy the fun of the child's learning!
A good thing about a curriculum is that it can act as an aide-memoire, reminding us of what we hope to do each week. It would not of course be a disaster if we missed out on science one week, or spent more time on Music than on History. The curriculum just tells us what we hope to be covering one way or another. I honestly cannot see why so many people are afraid of it.
Here is a very simple curriculum; English, Mathematics, History, Geography, Science, Art, Music. How could such a curriculum work in practice? Let's look at one subject, Art. This could involve painting, drawing, making models from plasticine, visiting art galleries, looking at books about artists, watching television programmes, the list is endless. Just by doing one or two of those things each week, Art has been covered. What about science? Visits to zoos, keeping and observing an ant farm, hunting for fossils, watching tadpoles grow, going to a museum, attending a lecture, reading a Horrible Science book, watching television. One or two of those activities each week and science is covered. And so it goes on.
Most of these things are already being done by most home educating parents. In other words, the lifestyle and educational techniques used with their children will not have to change in the slightest degree in order to comply with the recommendation for a "Plan of Work". I am guessing that many parents are following a curriculum already, even if they do not call it by that name and have nothing written down. Most of us arrange a programme of event for out children which cover areas like art and music. Few parents fail to read to their children or discuss aspects of science with them. A curriculum like the one above does not tie a parent down to any particular activity or force the child to do anything against her inclinations. There is nothing scary about it, still less is it likely to destroy the fun of the child's learning!
A good thing about a curriculum is that it can act as an aide-memoire, reminding us of what we hope to do each week. It would not of course be a disaster if we missed out on science one week, or spent more time on Music than on History. The curriculum just tells us what we hope to be covering one way or another. I honestly cannot see why so many people are afraid of it.
Saturday, 17 October 2009
What shall we tell the children?
Like most parents, I have always seen it as part of my duty not only to protect my child from harm, but also from worry and anxiety, at least where this is possible. For example, a few years ago it seemed that we might lose our house. This was very worrying for me as an adult, but I could see no earthly reason to make the children upset about the prospect of being turfed out of their home, especially as there was absolutely nothing they could do to help. I accordingly said nothing to them about it. In the event, matters resolved themselves. If it had been inevitable that we would have to move, then I might of course have adopted a slightly different strategy, slowly accustoming them to the idea of moving. I am circuitously approaching the subject of visits by local authority officers to home educating families, something about which many parents are up in arms.
The truth is, coverage of the Badman report in the newspapers and on television has been sparse in the extreme. Unless their parents had made a point of telling their children about it and explaining what they see as the hidden implications in the recommendations, it is unlikely that many children would even know anything of the matter. I find it strange then that so many children are apparently becoming distressed and anxious over the possibility of home visits. Such anxiety must surely be coming from their mothers and fathers?
It is by no means certain at the moment whether the law relating to home education is actually going to change. If and when it does, there will be many months to prepare children for the prospect of a visit by the local authority. What reason can there be to upset children by telling them a lot of scare stories about new laws that have not even been passed yet? It strikes me that it is the parents who are getting worked up about all this and frightened of the idea that people will be entering their homes to assess the quality of the educational provision being made for their children. I make no comment at all on this; I have no idea whether they are right to be concerned about it. What I am quite sure of is that it is, to say the least of it, unfortunate, if their children are roped into the business as well and made to share their parents anxieties. In other words, I think that it is not Graham Badman, the local authority or its agents who are making the children distressed, but their own parents.
I was not exactly enchanted when Essex LEA notified me that they wanted to come busybodying round the place to see what I was up to with my own daughter. However, as I said at the select committee, I do recognise that society has a stake in my child and so I did not tell them to get lost. Nor did I mention the matter to my eight year old daughter. There would have been no point; it might have made her feel nervous. Instead, I waited until after breakfast on the morning that the visit was due and then said casually, as though I had just remembered it, "Oh by the way, some fool is coming from the council later. They want to make sure that I'm not keeping you chained up in the attic." She laughed and we carried on as usual. the result was that the woman's visit was of no more significance to my daughter than a visit from the man coming to read the gas meter. This is in stark contrast to accounts that have been placed in the comments here from mothers who say that visits from the LA cause the family to be tense for a couple of months in advance and for a month or so afterwards. According to such parents, the whole business causes disruption to their way of life and alters the style of their educational methods. I am pretty sure that tension of this sort is all too often created, or at least greatly exacerbated, by parents.
I rather suspect that as the prospect of new regulations draws ever closer, so we shall be hearing more and more alarming stories of children on the verge of nervous breakdowns at the thought of LA officers entering their homes. I do not for a moment suppose that the children's fears are being encouraged deliberately, but I cannot help but think that it is unnecessary for us to pass our own worries onto our children in this way.
The truth is, coverage of the Badman report in the newspapers and on television has been sparse in the extreme. Unless their parents had made a point of telling their children about it and explaining what they see as the hidden implications in the recommendations, it is unlikely that many children would even know anything of the matter. I find it strange then that so many children are apparently becoming distressed and anxious over the possibility of home visits. Such anxiety must surely be coming from their mothers and fathers?
It is by no means certain at the moment whether the law relating to home education is actually going to change. If and when it does, there will be many months to prepare children for the prospect of a visit by the local authority. What reason can there be to upset children by telling them a lot of scare stories about new laws that have not even been passed yet? It strikes me that it is the parents who are getting worked up about all this and frightened of the idea that people will be entering their homes to assess the quality of the educational provision being made for their children. I make no comment at all on this; I have no idea whether they are right to be concerned about it. What I am quite sure of is that it is, to say the least of it, unfortunate, if their children are roped into the business as well and made to share their parents anxieties. In other words, I think that it is not Graham Badman, the local authority or its agents who are making the children distressed, but their own parents.
I was not exactly enchanted when Essex LEA notified me that they wanted to come busybodying round the place to see what I was up to with my own daughter. However, as I said at the select committee, I do recognise that society has a stake in my child and so I did not tell them to get lost. Nor did I mention the matter to my eight year old daughter. There would have been no point; it might have made her feel nervous. Instead, I waited until after breakfast on the morning that the visit was due and then said casually, as though I had just remembered it, "Oh by the way, some fool is coming from the council later. They want to make sure that I'm not keeping you chained up in the attic." She laughed and we carried on as usual. the result was that the woman's visit was of no more significance to my daughter than a visit from the man coming to read the gas meter. This is in stark contrast to accounts that have been placed in the comments here from mothers who say that visits from the LA cause the family to be tense for a couple of months in advance and for a month or so afterwards. According to such parents, the whole business causes disruption to their way of life and alters the style of their educational methods. I am pretty sure that tension of this sort is all too often created, or at least greatly exacerbated, by parents.
I rather suspect that as the prospect of new regulations draws ever closer, so we shall be hearing more and more alarming stories of children on the verge of nervous breakdowns at the thought of LA officers entering their homes. I do not for a moment suppose that the children's fears are being encouraged deliberately, but I cannot help but think that it is unnecessary for us to pass our own worries onto our children in this way.
Tuesday, 22 September 2009
How do I know that home education is sometimes used as a scam?
For a number of years I have worked part-time for a small charity based in East London. Among other things, I act as an advocate for the parents of children with special educational needs. This entails visiting their homes, most of which are on large housing estates. In recent years, I have noticed that many of these estates seem to have at least one or two youths hanging around who look as though they are only fourteen or so. Some are truanting, others have been excluded, but there are also those who have been de-registered because their parents are allegedly home educating them.
Whenever I visit a family to discuss their child's needs, I always ask if they know of any children living nearby who are home educated. This is sheer nosiness of course. Even worse, is the fact that if I can get an address I think nothing of knocking on the door and explaining that I have been visiting Mrs. X who lives on the fifth floor and that I am interested in home education. Almost invariably, I am invited in. Such invitations are less a tribute to my personal charm, which is in any case all but non-existent these days, and more to do with the fact that they think they might be able to get something out of me.
Once these parents realise that I am not employed by the local authority, they seldom bother to dissemble. The truth is that hardly any of them have ever had any intention of educating their children, either autonomously or otherwise. Why then have their children been de-registered? The reasons vary. Some have simply been unable to persuade their teenaged offspring to get out of bed in the morning and go to school. I have mentioned elsewhere that my own nephew fell into this category. Others have children who truant so regularly that they have been at risk of prosecution. Still others are parents of children who simply don't like school and can't see the point of going. Sometimes they can nag their parents into letting them stay at home on the pretext of home education.
There are sadder cases. One fourteen year old girl lived with her mother, who was mentally ill and agoraphobic. She hated it when her daughter went off to school for the day and left her alone. The daughter did not particularly enjoy school and so after a little research on the internet, she typed up a letter for her mother to sign, stating that she would home educate her daughter. The pair of them now spend the day watching television. If anybody asks, the daughter has told her mother to say, "We're autonomous." I doubt she even knows what the word means. In twenty first Century Britain this child has been abandoned by the system and now fulfils the role of nurse-companion to her sick mother. This is utterly disgraceful. Here, incidentally is a similar case from Norfolk which they gave to the Badman review;
"Faye's mother has mental and physical health problems; her elderly husband cannot fulfil the role of carer, so this has fallen to Faye. Faye's previous school did not inform our service at the time of her de-registration, so a considerable period of time elapsed before we became involved, during which time Faye had not received any education. There were various concerns about the appropriateness of home education due to Faye's home circumstances, along with her social isolation. Faye's mother refused an offer of support from Young Carers. Faye is obese and school phobic. She has regular hospital appointments relating to her obesity and associated problems and has been offered gastric band surgery when she is older. Faye's mother will not agree to any additional support, eg CAF, and has often been reluctant to meet with our service, cancelling various appointments at short notice. However, with support and encouragement over a period of three years, Faye's home education provision has improved."
I am not suggesting that autonomously educating parents are like this in general, nor that an autonomous education cannot be good for a child. The people I talk of above are at one extreme end of the home education spectrum. I rather think that the parents on this Blog lie at the other end; they are very committed to giving their children the best possible education, by whatever approach they choose. Somewhere between these two types lie the bulk of home educating parents, some of them doing well and others perhaps not quite as well. There might be parents who took their children from school intending to educate them and found they were not capable of doing so. Others who start well and then begin to flag, maybe need a little help and encouragement.
What I do know is that the current system is so slack that it enables many parents to take their children out of school without making any provision whatsoever for their education. I believe this to be a bad thing and it is for this reason that I am in favour of some of the recommendations in the Badman Report. I am aware that these might well inconvenience some genuine home educators, but I feel that this is a price worth paying.
Whenever I visit a family to discuss their child's needs, I always ask if they know of any children living nearby who are home educated. This is sheer nosiness of course. Even worse, is the fact that if I can get an address I think nothing of knocking on the door and explaining that I have been visiting Mrs. X who lives on the fifth floor and that I am interested in home education. Almost invariably, I am invited in. Such invitations are less a tribute to my personal charm, which is in any case all but non-existent these days, and more to do with the fact that they think they might be able to get something out of me.
Once these parents realise that I am not employed by the local authority, they seldom bother to dissemble. The truth is that hardly any of them have ever had any intention of educating their children, either autonomously or otherwise. Why then have their children been de-registered? The reasons vary. Some have simply been unable to persuade their teenaged offspring to get out of bed in the morning and go to school. I have mentioned elsewhere that my own nephew fell into this category. Others have children who truant so regularly that they have been at risk of prosecution. Still others are parents of children who simply don't like school and can't see the point of going. Sometimes they can nag their parents into letting them stay at home on the pretext of home education.
There are sadder cases. One fourteen year old girl lived with her mother, who was mentally ill and agoraphobic. She hated it when her daughter went off to school for the day and left her alone. The daughter did not particularly enjoy school and so after a little research on the internet, she typed up a letter for her mother to sign, stating that she would home educate her daughter. The pair of them now spend the day watching television. If anybody asks, the daughter has told her mother to say, "We're autonomous." I doubt she even knows what the word means. In twenty first Century Britain this child has been abandoned by the system and now fulfils the role of nurse-companion to her sick mother. This is utterly disgraceful. Here, incidentally is a similar case from Norfolk which they gave to the Badman review;
"Faye's mother has mental and physical health problems; her elderly husband cannot fulfil the role of carer, so this has fallen to Faye. Faye's previous school did not inform our service at the time of her de-registration, so a considerable period of time elapsed before we became involved, during which time Faye had not received any education. There were various concerns about the appropriateness of home education due to Faye's home circumstances, along with her social isolation. Faye's mother refused an offer of support from Young Carers. Faye is obese and school phobic. She has regular hospital appointments relating to her obesity and associated problems and has been offered gastric band surgery when she is older. Faye's mother will not agree to any additional support, eg CAF, and has often been reluctant to meet with our service, cancelling various appointments at short notice. However, with support and encouragement over a period of three years, Faye's home education provision has improved."
I am not suggesting that autonomously educating parents are like this in general, nor that an autonomous education cannot be good for a child. The people I talk of above are at one extreme end of the home education spectrum. I rather think that the parents on this Blog lie at the other end; they are very committed to giving their children the best possible education, by whatever approach they choose. Somewhere between these two types lie the bulk of home educating parents, some of them doing well and others perhaps not quite as well. There might be parents who took their children from school intending to educate them and found they were not capable of doing so. Others who start well and then begin to flag, maybe need a little help and encouragement.
What I do know is that the current system is so slack that it enables many parents to take their children out of school without making any provision whatsoever for their education. I believe this to be a bad thing and it is for this reason that I am in favour of some of the recommendations in the Badman Report. I am aware that these might well inconvenience some genuine home educators, but I feel that this is a price worth paying.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
